aaronmoravek (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Kill a banker buy a coin.

Flamestar1989 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

So money is an idea... if we all stopped believing in it, it would just be worthless paper. I think the fractional reserve system would be ok if there were tighter constraints on how much the bank is allowed to loan compared to the actual money it has. Corporate banking (the banks being privatised) is what caused collapse. Would it be better if we all started over again with a single currency and what you earned was simply... yours?

piecharthosen (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

THIS THIS THIS it's a ponzi scheme that (yes) allows for greater growth. but also with enough bad debts, the whole thing falls apart.

MotionInMotion1975 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

The problem comes up when the farmes, the workers and the factory builders ask for their money at the same time...

cannotbebothered100 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

part 5) thus FRB or bond certificates would be different from money notes proper

cannotbebothered100 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

so that loans themselves would no longer increase the money (proper) supply only for money taken out of circulation until its note of deposit is cashed in and extinguished. If a bank were to conflate notes for specie lent out be it called fractional reserve or a time delayed bond or whatever, those notes would find deficit of reserve behind them and thus cumulative lack of trust in them since they aren't for actually deposited specie

cannotbebothered100 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

(cont part 3) would on free markets be differentiated from banknotes for 100% deposits else trust in that notes likelihood to maintain its value would fall, its expansion of banknotes of unconditional redeemability would cause insolvency and acceptance of it would fall compared to the notes of banks that differentiate between money substitutes and certificates for redeemability of loans or fractional reserve loans

cannotbebothered100 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

@andrewldexter (cont) so the charges from the rentier are desirable in raising interest to impose costs of capital when there is consumption and to induce good allocations to raise dividends as of course the basis of social economisation for others is being influenced to consume less of what others need and to reduce strain on care systems for lower insurance premiums/prices etc. If hoarding arises then costs will fall to offset rates that might not & notes for loan receipt would on free markets

cannotbebothered100 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

@andrewldexter Inflation is not theft! But of course we don't want our earned money to devalue. These Keynesian fools claim that we need inflation to beget higher demand when the absence of demand for product simply reduces costs in reducing the proximity of capital to serving some human end, thereby enabling production for a future, as-yet absent consumption. Begetting such investment over time prior to finalising product distracts from producing 4 present consumption so the rentier charges

nnava5 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

my son needs a haircut